Facts
The defendant was employed as an unskilled worker at the [B. AG] cotton spinning mill in Kollbrunn from May 1992. On January 27, 1994, the employer informed the workforce that practically all employment relationships would be terminated as of January 31, 1994. This led to disputes between the workforce, supported by the Construction and Industry Union (GBI), and the employer, which culminated in a warning strike on March 21, 1994. On the same day, the employer announced the plant closure and terminated the majority of existing employment contracts, including that of the defendant, effective May 31, 1994. The defendant objected to the termination, which he considered abusive.
From March 23, 1994, the cotton spinning mill was struck by the workforce, in which the defendant also participated. On April 28, 1994, he terminated the employment relationship with immediate effect, simultaneously with other employees.
By decision of May 9, 1995, the single judge of the District of Winterthur fully upheld the claim of [B. AG] for compensation due to unjustified abandonment of the workplace and partially upheld the counterclaim of the defendant for compensation pursuant to Art. 336a CO in the amount of CHF 2,960.-- plus interest. However, the Cantonal Court of Zurich dismissed the defendant's claim for compensation, as it was not the ordinary termination by the plaintiff, but the defendant's termination with immediate effect that was the cause for the termination of the employment relationship.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court upholds the defendant's federal appeal. It states that a strike is lawful if it is supported by a collective bargaining organization, pursues goals that can be regulated by a…